botus99 wrote:That's because a developer makes their product for Nebula 3; a plugin that already works. Developers only need to make the library to their standard within Nebula 3, but Acustica's Acqua's are based on Nebula 4. So not only are they doing everything the developers are doing, they are integrating it into an entirely new engine! New engines have bugs, it happens. BUT I'm extremely glad that they let us "public beta" the Acquas. Why? Because you get the product sooner, it quickly gets better with updates (not to mention unexpected updates from time to time with older ones), and Acustica gets to see exactly how the new engine plays with everyone's setups.

If Acustica had deep pockets, then yeah they would be expected to test everything before releasing anything. But that's not the case here.

The requirements for a "professional" plugin are entirely subjective. Like for me, my prerequisite is that it sounds professional and processes audio. Couldn't care less what it looks like or if I have to deal with a few quirks. If it sounds that good, then it's worth it to me. In that regard, Acustica is the ONLY professional plugin company as far as I'm concerned. Just my 2 cents

well, wouldn't it be good then to have the devs on board, too. they have a deeper knowledge of Nebula than us and they already push Nebula 3 tech to its limits. they maybe could help to improve Nebula 4 tech even more so that we would have even better products. they surely know what they would need in order to make even better libraries.

Dimzo wrote:well, wouldn't it be good then to have the devs on board, too. they have a deeper knowledge of Nebula than us and they already push Nebula 3 tech to its limits. they maybe could help to improve Nebula 4 tech even more so that we would have even better products. they surely know what they would need in order to make even better libraries.

Somehow, I doubt it. Too many cooks in the pot ruins the recipe. Plus, I wouldn't assume that the developers all have coding/programming knowledge needed to really help. Sampling in NAT and building a version of Nebula require two completely different skill sets. In the end, their company is not a democracy run by the opinions of the userbase, but a constant attempt at recreating whatever it is that Giancarlo/Acustica imagine in their minds. It's totally their call and I, for one, trust them.

If it were wise to include any 3rd party developers in the Nebula 4 creation process, I would imagine little hesitation on Acustica's end to reach out to them.

i see it more as an extended beta test.normal users can test functionality etc and the devs could test new features in the sampling department for example.i don't have a fully knowledge of how it all works but i'm just sharing some thoughts. i'm aware of that the company isn't run by userbase opinions but we as a userbase can leave some feedback and/or questions, can't we?

if you are cool with everything what AA does then it's all good.i for myself find it a bit odd to say it's fortunate that the devs don't use the new features. i didn't understand if they could use them but don't do so or if they simply can't use them yet due to restrictions. in both cases i find the term "fortunate" doesn't fit.

Dimzo wrote:i'm aware of that the company isn't run by userbase opinions but we as a userbase can leave some feedback and/or questions, can't we?

Absolutely. We can also have differing opinions, and that's cool too

Dimzo wrote:if you are cool with everything what AA does then it's all good.i for myself find it a bit odd to say it's fortunate that the devs don't use the new features. i didn't understand if they could use them but don't do so or if they simply can't use them yet due to restrictions. in both cases i find the term "fortunate" doesn't fit.

Maybe I should have qualified my trust statement by saying that IMO I see G/Acustica as an entity with a vision that they are trying to realize. When I have a vision that I'm trying to realize, I don't want too many people around me while I'm in the "development stage" diluting the vision.

I try to have a basic understanding of, and expectation related to, every release that I buy. Based on my experience, I'm always impressed and many times feel like I'm getting a steal. Their products do work great for me, and have not been a source of problems for me. So you could say that yes, I trust them for my purposes. This doesn't necessarily have to mean that I approve of everything they do. But again, for my purposes, they have my trust.

About the "fortunate fiasco", the way I read it is that if they released these new features for developers at this point in time, it may be premature. This could lead to several different complications. If Acustica wants to sort things out internally first, it's their product. Personally, I say let them. They're definitely not dummies with this stuff. Plus, we have people like you that help further light a fire under their ass on occasion

don't get me wrong, i really love their products, too. i even upgraded my computer in order to use more Nebula and Aqua instances.if AA would have explained it the way you did, it would have been perfectly fine for me. maybe there was a misunderstanding as i know the're not native English speakers, too.

On computer upgrades / AA fever: I have only ever owned Mac/Apple computers & in fact first started using Apple in the late 70's with the Apple II (!) ..anyway I had to laugh at myself yesterday for the first time EVER, seriously browsing some new (Windows) pcs on sale, the reason being a cost-effective high power customized set up, optimized for AA/Nebula ... :-0

don't get me wrong, i really love their products, too. i even upgraded my computer in order to use more Nebula and Aqua instances.

...in the end i think that we all want them to do even better products

100% agree! We all want better products, and we all want them cheap and right now! Such is life haha. I've upgraded my RAM and CPU too since I started using Nebula, and pretty soon I will again. It's gonna be great in combination with Nebula 4! Some may find that ridiculous, but I so rarely use other plugins anymore because most just don't sound good to me.

With the 3rd party prices where they are, I feel that it all balances out (Nebula purchases and computer related purchases). PLUS you now have a more souped up computer. Win-Win as far as I'm concerned. Sure, I know I'm a fanboy, but I've tried the rest, and Nebula smokes them all IMO. Money well spent

But therefore 3rd party developers produce libraries of excellent quality and stability hardly any bugs or other malfunctions like most of the acqua plugins which are even beta tested, but still are not as functional as they are supposed be. So don't sit too high on the horse - it's sill a long way to go until AA acquas become something professional!

for the exception of compressors, we are not introducing new "variables"The new engine simply does better things which are already in production: loading time, latency, multiband instances, less mistakes during deconvolution - ie level jumps, generic errors.There is not a "new feature" thereWe have tons of features on the gui side - the skinning languageOn compressors/dynamic side there were a lot of improvements on the speedness and cpu load (how aria compressors work, they are amazingly light on cpu if you take in account the prog rate used)

There is a new big developement about envelope followers and nat detection and this is really new. Anyway it happened also in nebula3: we created compressors way before 3rd party developers could sample them.Compressor templates were finally available 2 years later, in 2009, when we were confident about the tech - and everything started to be fully automated.Yes, our compressors were a lot worse than what developers released, and they used the same tools. So we can expect big improvements even without creating anything new starting from now. It is possible we have already the tech for the best compressor possible in the software realm, already now. Time will tell you.It should be stated that many current acqua plugins were sampled by experienced developers. Stedal is very good, for example.

On compressor side we had the first "clean automatic deconvolution" (without my bugfix) in ultramarine, and later on in prime comp mk II and ivory comp.So we are close to a sort of automatic new procedure.In the future it is possible developers will move it to state-of-art, exactly like today some of them are using old tags for getting complex things not planned to work that way.Today they do not have variables linked to time and they are forced to hack the system in several ways. We have now attack time, release time and charge time sources, for example. Nat can decompose an attack or release shape to sub-shapes, or implement automatically a program dependant compressor in a very clean and simple way. You can sample a threshold. And so on.